Unethical Mailings

The debacle that is going on in the NTA sickens me. The fact that an anonymous postcard was mailed with my name on it -- WITHOUT MY AUTHORITY -- was unethical, and I demand to know who did this. Even if I had been extended the decency to answer yes or no, I would never have been part of an anonymous mailing of any kind. Secondly, the anonymous letter that has been mailed with slanderous remarks about current elected NTA directors is the lowest form of electioneering, and whoever is responsible for this should be kicked out of the NTA, if they are members.The NTA will not come through this unscathed, but I hope when this unscrupulous turn of events is behind us, we can all stand together once again for this industry that we love.

Thank you Larry!

Thank you Larry for asking the question that begged to be asked. Here is your answer:

GEORGE said: "Do you REALLY think that Bill would have mailed out a card that contained such a lie. The card lists Larry Blomquist, Greg Crain, Al Holmes, Don Holt, Mike Kirkhart, Archie Phillips and Mark Wilson as endorsing them. As most know, that's only a fraction of "all" the NTA preidents. Do you really think any of those presidents wouldn't endorse him? And of all those presidents, do you really REALLY believe anyone would use Larry Blomquist's name without having gotten his permission. Do you think Mike Kirkhart would allow his name to be used in a lie?"

And then TINA BARBER said: "I spoke with Greg Crain today and he told me that Bill and Frankey were responsible for the cards. That Bill purchased the labels from the NTA for the cards."

There is your answer Larry. I hope the rest of the NTA membership can see through this smokescreen and realize that certain people will do anything--and I mean ANYTHING--to keep their jobs within the NTA. If we ever recieve our ballots I hope the NTA membership will take back the NTA with this election. I wonder if the absence of ballots (today is the deadline--still no ballot) has anything to do with this election stunt?

Start asking questions people! Its your NTA--take it back or lose it forever!

Paul Czarneckiwww.tristatetaxidermy.com

Thank You Larry

This response submitted by KBauman on 5/31/06 at 11:57 AM. ( ) 70.252.112.25

Well spoken. Unethical is the correct term to describe the current tactics being employed. Someone told me once, anonymous opinions are not worth your thoughts, time or effort. They are the work of cowards, and don't let them bother you. If the person(s) had a backbone, they would sign their name to their thoughts. This is exactly what we have here. Thank you for speaking up.

Corrrection Needed

I must make a correction. I was immediately called after my post by NTA President Bill Haynes. Bill informed me that he had asked me several weeks ago if he had my endorsement. He told me I said yes. Bill is a long time friend and I apologize for not remembering this. I told Bill this morning that as a business figure in the industry that I have always tried to maintain a neutral position on political issues and did not intend any alliance to him be used in a political mailing. Bill I am sorry about this misunderstanding.

I will suggest to anyone doing something like this in the future to send a copy to all names mentioned before printing and mailing.

The rest is still slanderous

Even though Larry admits he forgot he said he would support Bill, he still hadn't intended for it to be used in printed material. What's more the rest of what Larry said is still true even if it was written by Bill Haynes. Larry said "the anonymous letter {now known to be sent by Bill} that has been mailed with slanderous remarks about current elected NTA directors is the lowest form of electioneering, and whoever is responsible for this should be kicked out of the NTA". Need I say more.

Jan

This response submitted by Bill Haynes NTA President on 5/31/06 at 3:36 PM. ( ) 72.15.90.234

Jan, ONce and for all, I did not send out that letter. I am as appalled as everyone.The letter came from soneone in Texas, not Georgia. I did mail the postcard. I bought the name labels from NTAHQ, paid with a personal check. I will pay for the cards and the printing when I receive an invoice. Several of my friends have offered to help defray the costs. I agree that Larry probably did not intend for me to use his endorsement as I did, but he did not say not to to it. I did mention at that time I was thinking of doing a mail-out,and he had no problem one way or the other. I also called Mike Kirkhart, Joe Meder and Tony Gilyard. Joe and Tony were not available, but Mike gave me his endorsement. I did not include Joe or Tony on my postcard. You need to get your facts straight.

Paul, speaking of "slander"

This response submitted by George on 5/31/06 at 5:20 PM. ( georoof@aol.com ) 152.163.100.8

I patiently await a gentlemanly apology for the insinuation thet I was lying. If I say it or write it, I believe it to be the truth until I'm proven wrong. If, in that unlikely possibility, I am wrong, I will quickly and publicly apologize. I've stated that on here dozens of times and I practice if faithfully.

There also needs to be an apology from you on misinterpreting the bylaws as far as ballots go. As I stated previously, the bylaws only apply to the NTA and not to the US Postal Service. Those bylaws state that ballots cannot be mailed out earlier than May 15 and no later than May 31. The NTA prints the ballots and presents them to a contracted CPA. That individual is made responsible BY CONTRACT to meet those parameters. The ballots have long since been presented to the CPA and the NTA was notified TODAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH NTA BYLAWS, that the ballots had been successfully MAILED OUT. Your initial comments were in complete error.

Larry knows full well that there are few people in this industry I have more respect and affection for that he. Whatever the reasons, I seem to become privy to many innate conversations and decisions along the way. I even recall vividly the last candidates Larry endorsed. I had no reason to doubt that he'd given verbal permission to this endorsement.

Now to Paul and Jan. To a degree larger that either of you is capable of understanding, I agree with your concepts of changes being required in this organization to bring it into the modern day. HOWEVER, I have to take your comments with a grain of salt. The NTA MEMBERSHIP elected both of you to do just that some years back. The MEMBERSHIP put their faith in both of you to accomplish that. Need I remind both of you that you abandoned that membership and resigned before fulfilling the membership mandate? It's tough to make changes from the peanut gallery and then to tell others what they should do after both of you decided to quit is a little ironic at best.

Back to Larry's comments now. I question the word "unethical" in todays heated climate of political correctness. I simply don't know where I could find some reference to "ethical" in our bylaws. Our "Code of Conduct" doesn't cover that and even if it did, the "code" is not part of any set standard. "Ethics" is something we all talk about, but they tend to be personal guidelines that we each answer to individually. To be charged with "unethical behavior" there would need to be some agreed upon standard and there simply is NOT one.

The next involves two terms: "slander" and "libel". In effect, they are the same; just different. Slander is spoken and libel is written or printed. In order for either to apply, however, there must be incontrovertable evidence that there was some conscious effort to portray an untruth. I got my copy of the letter today, and I don't care who says anything contrary, the author advertised it as "tongue in cheek" but I know for a verifiable fact that many of the comments were based on true statments. I can assure you, no one wants to file suit of slander or libel and ask me to be a witness or a defendant.

Next, and most importantly, IF in fact, this letter was either of those and that individual is banished from the organization as touted, then there had better be a whole lot of people turning in their memberships. Greg Crain was openly SLANDERED at the winter board meeting by several people who accused him of "lying", "stealing", "establishing a slush fund", and "skimming off the top". This was an open meeting to any NTA member and was discussed in an open forum. I was slandered by two of the board members who had copied, out of context, exerpts off this very site and presented them to this same meeting with the express purpose of embarrassing me and suggesting that "some action" be taken to prevent me from using this forum.

So the question that I pose to all of you bleeding hearts is this: Does "unethical", "slander", and "libel" only apply to certain select individuals who schmooze with each other, or do they apply to everyone in the organization. If it's the former, then I guess I'm not one of the chosen ones and I'll just have to suck it up, BUT if it's the latter, there'd damned well better be a lot of people heading out that door before this "unknown author" is taken to task.

"If the truth offends you, you need to avoid it at all costs." George Roof, 2006(Hey, Kim! How's that for "ownership"? LMAO)

It's unnecessary

Bill Haynes ask for my endorsment in his campaign for re-election. I told him no problem, yes that's fine. It is my hope that he is able to function with the Board and actualy employ some of his agenda that I am sure he has in mind.It is very difficult to do much in the 5 months he has held the title of president with all the hoopla that has been going on.(official tenure of all board and office positions begins in October, Nominations acceptance ends April 1st) It's almost wrong to expect the incumbent president to not accept the nomination for the return position offer if he or she is considered sincere at the task.The last 13 NTA presidents served 2 years because of this. It is also my belief that Bill is a good and capable leader if it were ever possible that the board could function together as planned.I hope that he is given that chance.Yesterday, I received the postcard but did not receive the letter.My friends Danny and Kim Owens did fax a copy to me. I am appalled at the hatefull comments made about all of these folks that I call my friends, and have enjoyed spending time with through the years. I know this kind of campangning is to say the least immoral and embarrassing to the organization. It mentions somthing about the Life Members Fund? I want nothing to do with this untactfull and shameless method of madness. Is this what we are reduced to? It is my understanding that this letter has nothing to do with the post card, I have spoke to a few other friends in the NTA today to assure them that I will continue to support the good and greatness that this organization has to offer.It is my hope that you all do the same.Remember the story in the Bible were Jesus says Let He without sin cast the first stone.?

I got the card and the letter

I cant believe this crap.Im a Life Memeber and I sure as hell didnt help pay for this,or did ? I guess in a way I did with them spending our dues $$.Whoever or Whomever did the letter if the truth ever comes out I feel they should 1st make a formal appology to all Life Members and current members for this crap and they should be banned from the NTA for LIFE and should pay each current NTA member 39 cents.Not much until you figre out how many active members their really are.I dont have a clue as to who to vote for now and I think that was the whole reason for this happening. They won in a way I guess.Makes me embarrased to tell people Im a NTA member.Hell I may just not vote at all this year.Whoever gets in gets in the way I feel right now.It is sad to see people stoop so low as to do things like this.It reminds me of the time several yrs ago when I had a customer call and I wasnt home to take the call so he calls the guy down the road from me.This guy tells him I dont do that kind of work anymore. BS. Long story short I lost it and called the guy and threatened him with a law suit if he ever pulled that with me again.I just hope that this matter gets resolved and the members behind it are punished for being so stupid.Jeff (upset NTA LT Member)

Jeff, why would you think that?

This response submitted by George on 5/31/06 at 11:22 PM. ( ) 152.163.100.8

These were two separate and unrelated, though scarily chronologically close events. The post card was mailed by Bill Hayes who admits such. He paid the NTA as prescribed by board directive to the Executive Director (LABELS, not mailing lists, can be sold to "friendly" sources). These labels were affixed to post cards he also bought and had printed with his own personal money. Several other members agreed to help him defray costs , but AT NO TIME, was NTA money used.

The second letter, postmarked from Lubbock, Texas was sent in preposted USPS envelopes obviously paid for by the anonymous author. The "labels" used on those envelopes was simply an enlarged copy of the membership roles contained in the NTA OUTLOOK Annual Report. Someone had literally cut and pasted each name from the Annual Report on envelopes. If you're a CT, Aof E or Life Member, you can readily verify this by matching the label up with your name as it apprears in OUTLOOK. The NTA did not pay for this mailing and none of your dues were squandered on this. So don't get your BVD's in a wad over this. The NTA didn't OFFICIALLY sanction either the post card OR the letter and certainly didn't spend any money on either.

More Than a Business Figure

This response submitted by John Janelli on 6/1/06 at 8:16 AM. ( sinclairsjj@aol.com ) 205.188.116.66

You are a living icon Larry. The words you speak and write are forever carved in the stones of our community, however imperfect we may appear to be. Obviously you can see how your first post inflamed various members to dig their heals in against some very fine people. From reading these posts, the infamous letter that's being referenced these days might well be a slanderous attack on perhaps other very fine people. But, I cannot understand now, as I did not then, how we both saw a mutual friend of ours be subjected to a very real, cruel and vicious form of charecter defamation and, without proof or evidence I might add, by two officers at the last winter board meeting, yet you chose to remain silent through it all. We also saw how two officers wanted George Roof hung and drawn because he always does in fact sign his name to anything controversial in the NTA that he expresses himself about. He's been a contributor, employee and friend of yours, yet again you chose to remain silent. On the other hand, you know very well more than anyone here that our vice president is holding his office and seeking to attain a higher office contrary to NTA bylaws which was at the root of that letter. We all hold you in the highest esteem as our parliamentarian, yet when even you suggested to the VP that he needed to step down, he refused. What makes a VP so impervious to bylaws I'll never know. I can fully understand why you would come here to defend what you thought was the unwarranted use of your name, but you still did it by making another dear friend of yours take the heavy for it. If by now you haven't seen the way some board members have been addressing, threatening and harrassing headquarters and our president lately with their own exigencies, take the time to look. Such abuse in any work place from employers would never be tolerated yet it's borne almost on a daily basis by the very people who also consider you a very precious friend. Your name next to mine is like comparing Solomon with Nimrod. I mean no disrespect whatsoever to anyone in this post and certainly not you Larry. Nor do I think I am qualified or even deserve to have an opinion here. That being said, I could pretend to know and see less than the rank and file member does. I can no longer pretend not knowing and seeing how much it hurts any longer.

Why ?

Why was the vp asked to step down ?What exactly is this letter about ?Are board meetings closed or open ? It seems to me if everything was public there would be less controversy.Are the Crain's employees or volunteers of NTA ?What is the term length of officers ?